Can you name one? All the readers I'm familiar with have an outer plastic screen over the glass substrate of the eInk display; the glass substrate is much too fragile to be exposed.

It's something I learned here on this forum. I can't put my fingers on a post now, but during discussions of touch technologies, it was mentioned more than once that on the Kindle and Nook and others, you are actually touching the eink module and not some early-Sony-Like cover that would degrade appearance.

There is clearly nothing between the eink module and the front cover opening.
(and we'll just ignore that he calls it an "LCD").

But if you mean that the front of the of the module is made of plastic and not glass, I'll take your word for it. I was referring to the fact of it being a single exposed, expensive component. I'm not sure why I said "glass surface" and not just "surface." I had no idea what the material is. Perhaps seen I've seen so many cracked, I assumed the surface was was glass.

Perhaps seen I've seen so many cracked, I assumed the surface was was glass.

I have not seen any cracked surfaces at all, as far as I can recall. The broken screens I have seen pictured actually have perfectly fine surfaces, but the fragile glass substrate under the surface had been broken.
This new layer BN is adding to the surface has me a little worried if indeed it is more sensitive than the regular surface (whatever material that is - I have no clue either).

Obviously having those lights on is going to cut down on battery life; the only question is how much. Considering that in use they are on constantly (unlike the e-ink screen that, from what I understand, essentially only uses power on page turns and refreshes), you have to think it's going to be somewhat significant, even if they are super-efficient LED lights. So I'd be surprised if it isn't a significant hit.

but doesn't the NST have LED lights on all the time anyway? i was under the impression that the "touch" was implemented via a grid of LED lights just above screen level, which will be on as long as you are reading (they turn off when the screen saver comes on).

i won't even hazard a guess as to how much power the infrared LEDs drain compared to the glowlight LEDs, but the existing lights don't seem to cost all that much power.

but doesn't the NST have LED lights on all the time anyway? i was under the impression that the "touch" was implemented via a grid of LED lights just above screen level, which will be on as long as you are reading (they turn off when the screen saver comes on).

i won't even hazard a guess as to how much power the infrared LEDs drain compared to the glowlight LEDs, but the existing lights don't seem to cost all that much power.

The ir emitters can use A LOT less power, like orders of magnitude less, as they only need to be detectable to a sensor a few inches away, as opposed to having to be not only detectable, but comfortable, to a human eye several feet away, after being reflected off another surface.

But for the sake of discussion, even if we assume that they used exactly the SAME power as the glow light, then now we are talking about DOUBLING the consumption.

Yup as mentioned the Infrared LEDs use a lot less power. I've seen IR LEDs that use on the order of microwatts of power per LED. If I had to wager a guess the total power budget of the entire infrared touch screen, both emitters, receptors and the signal processor probably is less than 10 miliwatts total. If I were to take a guess as to the total power budget of the glowlight LEDs, it is probably in the range of 50-200mw between minimum and maximum brightness (LED dimming also is not a linear change in terms of power consumption reduction and brightness level, an LED outputting 20% of its maximum luminance might be consuming only 30-50% of the power at maximum instead of 20%).

I have been doing a lot of reading during the past year, at least three hours each day. Since I do most of it indoors and at all times of day, the Nook Color and Tablet get the most use. I switch between them either when comparison-reading or if a charge gets low and I wish to continue.

In fact, since both also perform well in bright northern light, they prevail over the Touch outdoors too. The only times I use the Nook Touch is when I must read in direct sunlight.

It occurred to me that the new "Glow" version might allow me to take only one reader wherever I might go or find myself. It certainly would be lighter and smaller than the Touch/Tablet combination I sometimes carry.

As soon as my local B&N had a sample, I took my Touch and made a comparison -- which was interesting and intriguing. First, the Glow, with its light off, had ever-so-slightly less contrast than my Touch; the background color was a little more tan in color; neither were completely white. Second, with the light on, the Glow was much clearer; the contrast was much better -- it was easier to read, hands-down easier to read. I had to have one.

I became the first on the waiting list -- brought it home yesterday, the 30th, and have been running it alongside the 'plain-old' Touch and the Tablet.

I have used my new Glow from full darkness to direct sunlight. With the light on (25-50%), it is completely superior to the Touch -- except in direct sunlight. Direct sun completely nullifies the the advantage of the lighting (at any percentage level) and the slight contrast edge goes back to the Touch. The difference isn't great but does favor the Touch.

If I were going to read exclusively in direct sun, I would stick with the cheaper, simpler and likely more reliable Touch. But who does that? Besides, in every other lighting environment, I found the Glow to be the better reader. It is not perfect though.

At low level lighting (below about 25%) and in the dark, the illumination is uneven: First, there is an understandable brighter band of light just below the LEDs at the top. It is a small difference and I soon got used to it. Just below this band is a darker one. Their proximity makes both more prominent to my eyes. There is also a faint darker area about the size of a quarter (but roughly shaped) on the right side of the screen and about half-way down. Finally, there is a vague, irregular but full width darker area near the bottom. The differences are very slight and I soon forget about them when reading. Although, I shall follow up on this with B&N and let Y'all know what I learn.

The screen of the Glow is sharp and clear in the dark or a dimly lit room (think: watching television). However, there is no way that it can equal the clarity and sharpness of my Tablet under those same conditions. It weighs much less though which can mean a lot when reading in bed. I am not saying that it isn't good in the dark, it is very good in the dark, but, the Color and Tablet are better.

My only complaint is that the display lighting is slightly uneven. I am going to ignore this small detail and keep my new Nook Touch Glow. I am already becoming fond of it and will likely make it my go anywhere reader.

Hope this helps -- Joe Minton

I read in two situations: outside, many times in broad daylight (on the beach, in a park) and in bed. I really hate artificial light on epaper, reflections dancing everywhere. I have a Nook Color (my first tablet) and it gave me problems reading in daylight no matter how much I pumped the illumination. I chose the smallest of evils with an eink reader with light.

It doesn't mean my reasoning will bare any resemblence to reality, but I at least think it will. I am also rather intrigued by real user experiences for battery life. No matter what, battery life is still going to be way better than even the best tablets, but I do think the people who use the glow light most of the time are going to see a big hit to battery life, especially if they read a lot per day and have the brightness up high. Those who only use it at night and/or occasionally at lower brightness levels might not even notice a real difference in battery life.

That is my guesstimate anyway.

I really don´t need a two month battery, with 2 weeks with light on is more than enough. Yes it´s nice to have, but 1 week batt is more than enough.